The Tunnel is great but its Aspect Ratio is absurd

I really enjoyed The Tunnel. A fresh, exciting, brave film with an even braver business model of collapsing release windows and delivering via bit-torrent. Audience focused and satisfying, the Tunnel exemplifies some dynamic new Australian filmmaking talent. And I applaud loudly their gung-ho attitude on both the creative and business fronts.

But…. I have a serious bone to pick. A frustrating irregularity in an otherwise very good film. My bone is the films’ chosen Aspect Ratio and the entirely misguided headspace too many emerging filmmakers get trapped in - believing a Wider aspect will make their film more ‘Cinematic’…!

Why the bloody hell is The Tunnel filmed in an ultra-wide aspect ratio of 235:1…? What the fuck would posses the filmmakers to impose an aspect so completely out of kilter with, and dysfunctional to, the film they were making..?

The Tunnel is a film predicated on found footage, news reports and hand held amateur handycam footage and, as such, has no logical or plausible reason whatsoever to be framed in ultra wide and narrow 235:1 - an aspect that is solely the domain of high end cinematography in theatrical release fiction films. None of the source mediums and precepts the film exploits are in that aspect so why would the film be? The opening title slide even states - Blair Witch like - that “the following film depicts events that occurred in October 2007. It contains official police evidentiary material” - Putting such material in a 2.35:1 aspect has no plausible logic and takes on an awkward framing not only out of kilter with it’s intent but visually banal and unbalanced.

All this is then compounded with shallow depth of field interview setups where fully 2/3 of the screen is just background blur making for the most vacuous and empty of cinematic composition.

I cant fathom what creative decision making process  the filmmakers could have gone through that would lead them to deliberately choose the entirely artificial imposition of 2.35 onto a film where such an aspect lacks any authenticity.

And even if they had some legitimate creative justification to make the film 2.35 the bottom line is that 2.35 is a very difficult and challenging composing frame to work in. The compositional grammar, balance and proportion of 2.35 is entirely different from other widescreen aspects such as 1.85 and 1.77 (16:9). It is a visual grammar highly experienced DoP’s struggle with and unfortunately the filmmakers of The Tunnel lack the experience to pull off.

All this is compounded when we remember that The Tunnel is using an unorthodox distribution model that dispenses with the traditional theatrical release and gives the film away on bittorrent to be viewed overwhelmingly in the home and NOT in a cinema theatre. So what we have then is a film composed in an aspect geared specifically for the theatre (the only screen type where 2.35 works and is visually functional) but which is obviously intended to be viewed on widescreen home TVs and computer monitors which are 16:9 or 16:10 in aspect. Subsequently when you watch The Tunnel you do so with 1/3 of the screen real estate relegated to top and bottom black bars.

Why the fuck would the filmmakers choose to make me watch the film through a narrow slit with 1/3 of my screen going to waste? How the hell does that make my viewing experience anything but reduced and diluted- one where I am constantly reminded of the artificial nature of what I’m watching by those God-damned black bars! Why make the picture on my small screen even smaller….????

Please don’t get me wrong - I loved The Tunnel and am cheering loudly for its success. But this choice for 2.35 aspect is entirely ill conceived. If the objective is to make a film feel ‘cinematic’ then do it with ideas. Let the aspect framing be governed only by content - story, scenario, tone, mood, concept and character - not an arbitrary and misguided idea of what ‘cinematic’ is. You cant make a film more Cinematic by making it narrower. You cant make it feel more Theatrical by making it wider. 

I fear so many indie shorts and features are shot 2.35:1 as a way of making the filmmakers feel validated or legitimized as ‘proper’ movie makers - the strange notion that ‘real’ films are 2.35:1 and so shooting in this aspect means you might get taken more seriously as a ‘real’ filmmaker…. I’m not suggesting this is the motivation of the makers of The Tunnel, but it is an unspoken motivation behind too many indie and student films. 

Citizen Kane is arguably the most visually cinematic film ever made and its 4:3…!

I look forward to seeing what the makers of The Tunnel do next but I sure as hell hope they take a more considered approach to their aspect ratio next time.

Comments

[Yitux]

Do you know a reason why 2.35 is son wanted? I mean, there should be a reason most of us like it, not just because it looks more 'cinematic'. I think it has something to do with the gold number, but 16:9 is closer to the auric relation. Hope you could help me in my doubt in some way.

PD: sorry for my bad englis. im from Ecuador.

Salures.

[Grisha]

you are so bloody right!